yeah, that would be cool. introducing the all-new nissan pathfinder. it's our most innovative pathfinder ever. nissan. innovation that excites. ♪ this morning on "meet the press," an unfolding scandal in washington and the new battle over the fiscal cliff. the election celebration is short-lived a surprise resignation by cia director david petraeus comes days before congressional hearings probing the attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi. we will get reaction this morning from capitol hill and the very latest reporting on this developing story from our chief foreign affairs correspondent, andrea mitchell, who broke the story friday afternoon. also, the president and republicans get set to negotiate new taxes and spending cuts. is a breakthrough possible? >> i'm open to compromise. i'm open to new ideas. it was debated over and over again.

and on tuesday night, we found out the majority of americans agree with my approach. >> mr. president, this is your moment. we are ready to be led. not as democrats or republicans, but as americans. now, we want you to lead. >> where does it all go from here? we will ask democratic senator from new york, chuck schumer and republican senator from oklahoma, tom coburn. also, we check in with cnbc's jim cramer to hear about the economic status should washington fail and avert fiscal disaster by the end of the year. plus, what is the future of the gop after a stinging defeat for romney and the republicans? and how will president obama govern in a second term? we will talk to a new letter elected democratic congressman, joaquin castro. plus, republican strategist steve schmidt, presidential historian, doris kearns goodwin,

whip, nbc's political director and chief white house correspondent, chuck todd and the "washington post's" bob woodward. >> announcer: from nbc news in washington, the world's longest running television program this is "meet the press" with david gregory. good sunday morning. the newly reelected president's message on friday, get back to work but the focus of that work and on that work is now overshadowed by friday afternoon's resignation of cia director david petraeus, which sent, as you know, shockwaves through washington. new details emerging now this weekend about the fbi investigation that led to the discovery of what officials believe was an extramarital affair between petraeus and his biographer, paula broadwell. of course, so many questions where this goes from here. joining me on the latest with this developing story, the "washington post's" bob woodward and our own chief foreign affairs correspondent, andrea mitch, who broke the story, as i mentioned on friday. andrea, here we are sunday morning, new details. we know there was someone close to petraeus who got threatening e-mails, a whistleblower, she goes to the fbi and that's how they get to the affair.

>> this other woman, and we know that she is not in the government and that she is not a family member, complained to fbi about what she felt were harassing and threatening e-mails. with that investigation that led to -- they were anonymous e-mails that led to broadwell's e-mail account and by examining paula broadwell's e-mail account that's how they uncovered, or stumbled, as they put it, into this. >> sexually explicit e-mails between broadwell and petraeus, what we are led to believe talking to authorities. some indications in these e-mails of a ongoing relationship according to fbi officials and other officials with whom we've spoken. we should stress, there was never an investigation into petraeus and they have pretty much shut down there was any idea there was security or national security leaks, so this is not a criminal matter and would have rested there had not, and this is what is new in the last 24 hours, it not come to the attention from an fbi whistleblower to a member of congress who then reported to

eric cantor, the republican leader, who then said to the fbi, tough take this further. they were not, at that stage, going to the white house with it. and questions raised why did it come to the attention of the national intelligence on tuesday, 5:00, election day. why did it not come to the white house's attention the next day wednesday. >> bob, before i turn to you, paula broadwell, writes a book called "all in," david petraeus. part of promoting that book, she did interviews, including on "the "daily show,"" talks a bit about how they struck up this relationship, biographer and subject and her trips to afghanistan. let's watch a portion of that >> you're a runner, and to get to know him, he wanted to run with you. so you ran together? >> this is a typical men -- mechanism he uses to get to know young people. he has done it throughout his life, so, it was an opportunity for me to interview him on a run and i think it was -- i thought i would test him and he tested me and it ended up being a test

for both of us since we both ran pretty quickly. but that was the foundation of our relationship. and when i was in kabul works do a lot of interviews on runs. for him, it was a good distraction from the war. of course, he was a bit concerned, as someone in his position would be about legacy and also, he meant it from a mentoring point of view and wanted to help them with this project. >> petraeus is 60, she is 40, mother of two, married herself. what stands out to you this morning? >> obviously, he was enchanted with her. interestingly enough, i think the david petraeus story is not going away. just this coming week there are going to be hearings in the house in the intelligence coast on the benghazi episode where a month ago, four americans, including the ambassador, were killed. it turns out that petraeus a week and a half if ago went to tripoli, libya, and conduct ed

his own personal inquiry into benghazi, interviewed the station chief, actually got the base chief from benghazi down, interviewed him, interviewed the head i think twice of the quick-reaction force that was involved in this episode. so he knows the full story. i -- he has a lot of credibility with republicans who, as we know, are on fire about benghazi and now the acting cia director, mike morell, is going to have to present this evidence. >> new information that you have this morning. what was going to be the takeaway from what petraeus would have presented, had he testified? >> i think it would essentially back up the white house and there are still unanswered questions and so forth but one of the things petraeus always did was dig deep and so he apparently -- there are videos and there are tapes and tapes and pictures and things that can be show. so it is not going away and the question will be, i

suspect, will he be asked to testify as a private citizen, either informally, in closed door and so forth. probably only petraeus can -- if he has the data, stop this benghazi frenzy. >> andrea, did he have to resign? >> a lot of people say not, he felt that he eventually had to -- we know the head of intelligence, clapper, told him he should. the president asked for 24 hours to think it over and then suggested -- >> all this comes in on election night, clapper into the white house. >> which is why conspiracy theorists are going -- running wild with it. i'm persuaded, as far as all of my reporting, that the white house did not know about this until wednesday that clapper didn't know about it until tuesday night and just a word, it's veterans day. and we should say something about holly petraeus. she has been a hero among the military families for her work. when they were stationed in kentucky, she was not the general's wife. she was really one of the team, one of the spouses.

and her work on consumer protection and financial education should continue and i hope she can find a way to continue her career. >> but there's a political dimension to this for obama and the white house. they wanted to keep petraeus. petraeus is very important, credible. as we know from history, cia directors can cause presidents great grief. the bay of pigs, wmd not in iraq and so forth. also, they can do very important things for presidents, like the bin laden raid, which was a covert cia -- >> i know from spending time with him in his current role, how much he loved this job, engaged by this job and had tremendous bandwidth in terms of his counterterror operation. a lot of questions who replaces him. >> very quickly, he was transforming the agency. add rocky start but he was seeing a global vision, the economic future, looking at asia, looking at china. he was going well beyond the counterterror operations. really transform that.

>> he did the honorable thing. he had to resign, given this. i don't think there was any question. >> more on this when we discuss it with our roundtable, andrea mitchell, bob woodward, thank you very much. i want to turn now to two key voices in the senate, democratic senator from new york, chuck schumer and oklahoma republican senator, tom coburn. senators, welcome, both of you back to "meet the press." senator schumer, let me start with you this morning. dianne feinstein, the senate intelligence committee chairwoman indicated this after the news of petraeus -- do you wish he had not resigned over this? >> i leave this to general petraeus. he's been such a hero in so many ways. i have known him, he's new yorker, i spent time in iraq with him. your heart breaks for him and his wife f he thought it was appropriate to resign, i will leave it with him. >> senator coburn, your thought

on that. >> i think leadership matters and setting an example. i don't think he had any choice given the sensitive nature of everything he does that he could have any questions about his character's integrity so i think he did the honorable thing. >> senator coburn, let stay with you, the benghazi questions that bob woodward mentioned. petraeus's own fact finding on this, preparing to testify, both republican ups and democrats as well with a lot of questions about the cia's role, whether there was enough communication, whether there was enough security on the ground and why not if that was not the case that would endanger our personnel there in our consulate. what do you believe about the remaining questions and what role petraeus still plays in anticipating them? >> i think he needs to answer them. he was obviously the person in charge of the cia and he has information that probably other people don't have. so, i think it is still going to be important his input comes into the conclusion and what we find about what went wrong were made.

we obviously weren't prepared. i think you have to spend time to find out what happened and how it happened. and get to the bottom of it so we don't see this kind of mistake again. >> senator schumer? >> i think first we ought to see what mr. morell has to say and is he able to give the committee the information that general petraeus dug up when he was over there in iraq and then we should take it from there. >> let's talk now about the fiscal cliff, where the debate turns in washington after the election. let's remind the viewers what we mean when we talk about the fiscal cliff. this is what is happening at the end of the year. the bush tax cuts expire, taxes go up. the emergency unemployment benefits end. the 2011 payroll tax moll day expires. the alternative minimum tax kicks in. taxes automatically go up. plus, at the same time, you have nearly $1 trillion in spending cuts that are automatic what we mean by the sequester, half of that in defense and non-defense cut russ triggered that's what has to be averted, senator

coburn. here is my bottom-line question. my view is that if there is a mandate from this election, it's about compromise in washington. so, what pain do republicans have to accept to get to a deal, in your judgment? >> i think you heard the speaker of the house say they are ready for the president to lead, agree to revenue increases but i think they are also interested in making sure we downsize appropriately, the federal government in terms of its waste. there is -- there is no question that we have a government that's twice the size it was 11 years ago. and we can find the money through sequestration or directly from what the house has passed, which is difference than sequestration by a different amount. the $1 trillion is over ten

years, so 100 billion over a $3.7 trillion budget, which is less than 3%. >> i just think it's important before we go through the litany of this, is the bottom line that republicans losing this election means, as the president said that they have to give in and allow taxes to go up on wealthier americans? >> i think they already agreed to that. i think you heard john boehner say that already. we have had votes in the senate where we have gotten rid of tax credits. i think that's given and the vast majority of the americans agree with that. the question is, how do you do that and how do you allow taxes to rise? at the same time, you fix the real problem and the real problem is uncontrolled entitlement spending and a government that has grown massively, not just under this administration, under republican administration. so, you have to approach both sides of it. >> let me turn to senator schumer.

i will ask you the same question. if the mandate is compromised what do democrats have to be prepared to accept as a painful outcome in order to achieve compromise? >> well, i agree with you, the mandate is compromise. that's why we have a divided house and senate. i think if the house stands for anything it is cut government spending, as tom coburn said, and i think we have to do more of it. we heard the mandate 2010, where it was a clear mandate you cut spending and we did, we cut $900 billion in spending that we didn't like, painful to us. but there's also a clear mandate on the other side, david, and that is the president campaigned on letting the bush tax cuts expire above people of $250,000 income. he campaigned on it clearly. he didn't back off from it. 60% of the people agreed with it. that's what's on the other side my judgment, maybe a little

define than tomorrow tom's, what messed up these agreements is revenues. we never really get real revenues because people believe in some things like dynamic scoring, sort of a counterintuitive view that if you cut taxes, you will get deficit reduction and increased government revenues. it doesn't make sense. i call it rumpelstiltskin after the gnome who turned straw into gold it is a fairy tale. we need the republicans to do in 2012 what we did in 2010. we heared m the mandate, contine to cut spending but they have to heart man date, real revenues, not this kind of stuff like dynamic scoring that speaker boehner did mention. >> i have talked to a top republican in the senate in recent days and say you look, the president has got some leverage on taxes but it was nice to hear him say this source said that he talked about more revenue, not necessarily higher rates. you have talked about that this week as well, senator schumer could you live with not raising tax rates and finding a way to

get enough revenue by closing loopholes and means to raise revenues? >> it is not mathematically possible if you stick by the other tenet, which is not raise taxes on people below $250,000. if you're going to get to the bowles-simpson number of $4 trillion of deficit reduction, which we have to do, and you're not going to increase taxes on the middle class, 250,000 or lower, which we shouldn't, their incomes are shrinking, the only way to do it, the only way mathematically i have seen to do it, is go to that 39.6% rate f someone can show another plan that doesn't do that we could look at it but no one's shown one because i think it's mathematically impossible. >> senator coburn, your thoughts for that? >> i put out the subsidies for the rich and famous whether the well-connected have benefited

themselves through the tax code. and we can get $39 billion a year just through very simple changes in terms of tax credits and eliminating total tax die -- deductions, which chuck has not recognize. if you limit total deductions and exemptions above $250,000, what you can essentially do is raise all sorts of money, which nobody -- nobody really wants to increase revenues because it does have a negative, detrimental effect on the economy, but, in fact, that's the part of the bargain that you have to do and we are at historic lows on revenue. so i've always agreed to it i voted for the simpson boles, i have been a part of the gang of six, the gang of eight. i agree that we have to go there, but how we go there is very important in terms of the incentives for capital investment in this country. and we have do it in a way that does not diminish that, turn quickly to lessons from this

election and where things go beyond this negotiation over the fiscal matters. senator schumer, immigration. are we going to get comprehensive immigration reform? it sounds like, if you listen to the house speaker, they have had a chang of heart, they want a comprehensive plan s there news to be made on this? >> i think so senator graham and i have talked we are resuming the talks that were broken off two years ago. we had put together a comprehensive details blueprint on immigration reform. it had the real potential for bipartisan support based on the theory that most americans are for legal immigration but against illegal immigration our plan does four things, first, close the border, make sure that's shut. second, make sure that there is a non-forgeable document so that employers can tell who was legal and who was illegal and once they hire someone illegally,

throw the book at them. third, on legal immigration -- that will stop illegal immigration in its tracks. third, on legal immigration, let in the people we need, whether they be engineers from our universities, foreign or people to pick the crops and fourth, a path to citizenship that's fair which says you have to learn english. you have to go to the back of the line, i've got to have a job and you can't commit crimes. graham and i are talking to our colleagues about this right now and i think we have a darn good chance using this blueprint to get something done this year. the republican party has learned that being anti-illegal and anti-immigrant doesn't work for them politically and they know t. >> senator coburn, what is the lesson for your party from this election? >> you have to be -- you have to demonstrate what you're for, not what you're against. i think that's the key ingredient and sell a vision positive for america, not a negative vision about what's wrong with america.

i think you have to have both but we didn't sell a positive vision. we didn't explain to people what we're for. i think that's the one thing we took away from the election, and that's what's lacking. >> do you see, senator schumer, a role for governor romney in this process, like to see the president bring him in to the negotiations over the fiscal cliff? >> you know about that but i would like to see him speak up. i think you could see him struggling in the general election, the hard right had moved him so far over on issues like immigration and i didn't think his heart was in it so he could help. you know, we need forces to help, when either party moves too far over they lose, democrats too far left, republicans too far right. you need some mainstream republican voices, you need the business community to speak up on the fiscal cliff and the need for revenues. you need people like romney and jeb bush and others to talk about a comprehensive immigration reform, so the republicans who have the courage

to stand up you and tom co-burp had that courage, don't just hear fromle the shrill right, and graham will do that on immigration. he will say that this morning. we need other people to do it the same. >> we will leave it there as this debate continues. accept to thank you both very much. >> you're welcome. coming up here, you heard where both sides stand. we are going to have some reaction to these two senators and analysis on where the negotiations go from here. also, the economic states, if lawmakers can't get a deal, what does it mean to all of us? we will check in with the host of cnbc's "mad money" that's jim cramer. and talk more broadly about the politics to postelection and more on this petraeus scandal unfolding around this roundtable. joaquin castro from texas, doris kearns goodwin, the historian of course, more from bob woodward and our own chuck todd, as we continue here on "meet the press."

coming up, the dow closed friday down 300 points for the week, finishing one of the worst weeks in the stock market, due, in part, about the concerns over the fiscal cliff. we will check in, in addition to the group, cnbc's jim cramer on the economic stake of this debate, whether the business community as well as well might be a natural ally for the white house in these talks, my view of what could happen. we will get into it all right after this brief commercial break. they have teachers... ...with a deeper knowledge of their subjects. as a result, their students achieve at a higher level.

let's develop more stars in education. let's invest in our teachers... ...so they can inspire our students. let's solve this. [ male announcer ] the way it moves. the way it cleans. everything about the oral-b power brush is simply revolutionary. oral-b power brushes oscillate, rotate and even pulsate to gently loosen and break up that sticky plaque with more brush movements

than manual brushes and even up to 50% more than leading sonic technology brushes for a superior clean. oral-b power brushes. go to oralb.com for the latest offers. and you pick the price that works for you. great. whoa, whoa, jamie. watch where you point that thing. [ mocking ] "watch where you point that thing." you point yours, i point mine. okay, l-let's stay calm. [ all shouting ] put it down! be cool! everybody, just be cool! does it price better on the side? no, it just looks cooler. the name your price tool, only from progressive. call or click today. i got you covered. thank you. oh, you're so welcome. and need to get my car fixed? progressive makes it easy, because we give you choices. you can pick where to get your car fixed, we can cut you a check, or, at our service center, we take care of everything for you. [ relaxing music playing ]

[ chuckles ] -whew, so many choices. -take your time. -the service center. -okay. giving you choices -- now, that's progressive. call or click today. we are back now with our panel. >> ahead of the launch of the movie adaptation "lincoln" starring daniel day-lewis, doris, herself, will be starring in -- no, roll the credits, so excited about "lincoln," our political director and chief white house correspondent after epic great work on the campaign, chuck todd. the "washington post's" bob

woodward still with us, and the newly elected republican strategist from texas texas, joaquin castro who just happens to have a twin brother who is the mayor of san antonio. oh, my god. the joke and the whole fun with the split screen -- never. that will get old, never. chuck todd, let's start with the scandal, about general petraeus. within the white house this had to be something that took him by surprise. them by surprise but then there was a big question does he need to resign? >> it really did. the president did take -- they didn't want to fill this step. it was funny to watch so many fairly high-level white house staff ers on friday didn't know why what was going on. didn't know this whole -- i mean, the president it was a tight circle of people that knew specific reasons and going down that road.

this isn't an opening they wanted to fill. they have plenty of openings they wanted to fill, particularly on the national security team. >> who could fill the void here? >> my understanding morel is popular f there was one knock on petraeus you would hear, and this is usually the case when an outsider comes to the cia, bob would know this better that most, they are not that popular with the rank and file. morell, he's career guy, very popular, i wouldn't be surprised if that acting title goes away, how tenant got the job. >> you know this from the bush administration, petraeus tight with the bush administration, there was not a lot of trust on the obama team of him, fear that he could run for president, not a great relationship between him and the president, seem to have been repaired, had to be part of the backdrop here, a certain lack of trust. >> well, general petraeus spent much of the last decade abroad, he has served this country very well. did the honorable thing. we have this tendency in washington to want to tear

people down when they have made a mistake, when they have fallen -- a legitimate american hero, he has got great contributions to make in the future. he will clearly have to navigate this very difficult personal issue but he has served this country well and this country is more secure today because of general david petraeus and this country owes him a debt of gratitude for that. >> no question about that doris, as i have said this weekend, not exactly a topic that brings husbands and wives closer together. your thoughts about this in terms of what should happen? >> i don't know. i think in general, i wish we could go back to the time when the private lives of our public figures relevant only if they directly affected their public responsibilities, what would we have done if fdr had not been our leader because he had an affair with lucy mercer. think of the productive years clinton could have had if monica lewinsky hadn't derailed him. we have to figure out a way with get our private sphere in -- we won't get the best people in public life if we don't do that. this is really sad, this man is

a great man, a great leader, for his career to come to an end because of a private matter that affects him and his family and doesn't have national security concerns, i don't know how you unravel it, i wish we could. >> unfortunately for the c.i.a. director, he has special status, and he's got to be clean. can't be blackmailed, threatened or deal with the anxiety, my god, are they going to find out about her? he did the right thing, telling associates now you and this is important, david, he is not going to hide under a rock. he is going to do other things. as steve suggests, his career is not over. his career at the cia is over. that's absolutely the right thing to do. i've known him for 20 years and petraeus is sort of the person the smallest little thing bothers him and to go through this, clearly a man of conscience made a grave mistake and just that, that anxiety is

the sort of thing that could set anyone on edge. >> i want to turn to we just heard from senator schumer and coburn about the fiscal cliff and talk to start about the mandate for the president in his second term, how do we define it? our colleague, ron torn yeah, wrote the following in the national journal on wednesday, digesting the election results. and this question of mandates, writes, obama victory comes with no mandate. he won a second term, but no mandate, thanks in part to his own small-bore and brutish campaign, victory guarantees, the president nothing more than, the president begins his second term under any delusion that the voters rubber-stamped his agenda on tuesday night he's doomed to fail. congressman, you're a democrat in san antonio, in a house still run by the republicans, we have a status quo election from that point of view, how do you define the mandates specifically around the fiscal cliff? >> the mandate for the american people for the congress to take

action. david, we have sat here for four years in a gridlock situation and people -- in 2010 and 2012 were clearly frustrated by that i disagree to a large extent, i don't think it's a rubber stamp, but i think the american people said to barack obama we agree with you on a lot of this stuff and want the republican congress to come along. remember, most of the most intransigent folks, alan west, almost michele bachmann, mothers the republican party who made their political careers saying they weren't going to go along with anything that the president wanted to do they lost their elections. >> i remember, steve, president bush, two days after the election, holding a press conference, the president will do it next week, but not immediately after the election, talked about how he viewed the mandate. this is what he said back in 2004. >> let me put it to you this way, i earned capital in the campaign, political capital and now i intend to spend it. it is my style. >> so how much capital does president obama have and where does he spend it? >> i think the president has

capital in the election. his victory was decisive but the map date should you can determined by the outcome of the election. and what the election has give the american people is divided government and the sides are going to have to work together. the president came to national prominence, promising to be a repairer of the breach in our politics and if he is going to go down in history as a successful president or even a great president or a near-great president, fess going to have to repair the breach in our politics and take leadership from him. >> specifically. >> the challenge in this i know you will bring in cramer on this, because wall street will end up playing the biggest role here. john boehner, can he get a majority of his republicans in the house to go along with whatever deal he cuts with the president? it's unclear to me. it's clear the republican strategy is they want to try to drag out the negotiations because do some short-term compromises, drag it out, see if the political space is better for republicans. say in six months, the president's capital and leverage

is in this small window, i would say the next two months, particularly before the end of the year. i will be curious to see does the president realize the best way to do this go find ten republicans in the senate, cut the deal with tom coburn, bob corker, lamar alexander, keep mcconnell out of it, do it with 65, 70 members of the senate, cut the deal, bring it over to the house, box -- which boehner secretly might want to be boxed in, by the way, box boehner in maybe it goes down the first time, a la t.a.r.p., we will see did the president learn anything from his first term how to deal with congressional republicans, don't do it through the leadership? >> "new york times," boehner tells house gop to fall in line, a tough conference call with him. i want to bring in jim cramer, host of cnbc's mad money. he is in new york. we see in the course of the campaign a lot of corporate ceos could become natural allies of the president. we need a resolution to this fiscal cliff business.

>> they have to, david, can gift wrap a recession by christmas, we can set it right into place without some agreement. the ceos have, in many ways, more to lose than anybody, why the market got hit this week and the market will continue to be hit until year end or an agreement. >> explain further what the economic consequences are. what do you hear on wall street and among corporate leaders about the -- frankly what happens if we go over the fiscal cliff? >> what i'm hearing and i speak to a lot of ceos and every single different industries they don't want to hire. they think the single biggest consequence of not knowing what's going to happen is that it's just worth it to lay off it. is not worth it to hire because with just a series of unknown of, who can take a chance, who can take a chance with washington, better to scale back retail, restaurant, industrial, fire people, that is the solution to the fiscal cliff until we get an actual resolution. >> jim, i always thought one of the big mistakes of the first obama term, he never had a moment in the rose garden where

he was flanked by the biggest business leaders in america and say look, we're going to work together in common cause to deal with our economy, fiscal position and ultimately affect america's influence in the rest of the world. can he have that moment now? >> yes, because -- >> will he? >> the leaders need him. the ceos need him, the businesses are going to go down, stocks are going to go down, what they care about, their own compensation and higher stock prices. i'm giving you lower stock prices for certain without a deal. >> jim cramer, thanks very much. doris, your point about this, as you look at it. >> what the president those do to build his mandate is play both an inside game and an outside game. he should use that political white house as an asset, more than he has done before. i would have a cocktail hour every night you have 40 republicans there, 40 democrats there, night after night after night, do what lbj did, more than he has done. the outside game means has to mobilize that base. that base was energized on election night. he said to them, your job is not

done it is not just voting it is there to bring pressure on obstructionist it is they don't get a deal done from the outside in. i think he signaled it that night because he said i've learned from you, i'm going to be a better president because of you. that was an amazing statement and i think he has learned he needs to use the white house as a political asset more inside and get those people. the tea party pressured everybody that summer, why can't his coalition, which is bigger, pressure people? >> i want to take a break and go back to bob woodward who has more reporting on how close they were on that grand bargain before and what that could tell us where they can go i do want to talk to everybody around here about how is it obama won? chuck's going to show us the numbers on that back with more of our roundtable, right after this. to compete on the global stage. what we need are people prepared for the careers of our new economy. by 2025 we could have 20 million jobs without enough college graduates to fill them. that's why at devry university, we're teaming up with companies like cisco

to help make sure everyone's ready with the know how we need for a new tomorrow. [ male announcer ] make sure america's ready. make sure you're ready. at devry.edu/knowhow. ♪

plus the perfecting color of a bb cream equal? introducing the newest beauty trend. total effects cc cream c for color. c for correction. [ female announcer ] fight 7 signs of aging flawlessly. cc what's possible. flawlessly. try running four.ning a restaurant is hard, fortunately we've got ink. it gives us 5x the rewards on our internet, phone charges and cable,

plus at office supply stores. rewards we put right back into our business. this is the only thing we've ever wanted to do and ink helps us do it. make your mark with ink from chase.

we are back with more from our round table, talk about politics and how the president one, i want to talk with the fiscal cliff. bob woodward, you have a document, a secret white house document that goes back to the grand bargain negotiations, tell us what it is and what it means, you think. >> well, this is the last offer the president, the white house made last year to speaker boehner to try to reach this $4 trillion grand bargain and it's long and it's tedious and it's got budget jargon in it, but what it show is a willingness to cut all kinds of things, like tricare, which is the sacred health insurance program for the military for military retirees.

to cut social security, to cut medicare. and there is some lines in there about we want to get a line in there we want to get tax rates down, not only for individuals but for businesses. so obama and the white house were willing to go quite far, in a sense this is the starting point, i guess you will put it up on your website after the budget wonks parse through it. >> that is the point. and congressman, i guess the question bob and i talked about, there's a lot of spending pain in there, democrats have to go back to folks and say, hey this is the pain you have to suffer. are you prepared to do that? >> there's no question. these are tough issues why there has been hammering and wrangling. i believe a democratic congress, especially in the house and in the senate that are willing to make those tough choices, that know in the long term, they have to reform entitlements, and we have to make sure there is revenue raising part of it and four years now

the republicans unwilling to do that i think election will get them in gear. and they'll do it. >> talk about this election, chuck todd, bleary eyed but still tough here on the sunday after the election. how is it the president won? >> demographics, pure and simple. people want to talk about san day and all of these other things. when you look at the structure of electorate, i think he wins on september 6th, october 6th or november 6th. let me show you why here. this is the makeup of the american voting electorate. in 2004, 2008 and 2012, white to non-white. look at the -- it is a trend line. by the way, two or three points, keep going back. we went back to 2000, '96, unmistakable, the trend line here. what happened, mitt romney, fewer whites, mitt romney's campaign truly believed the electorate would look like 2008. did not believe it was going to look like what it ended up looking like which, of course you can the obama campaign. two states in particular show you how the dramatic changes.

the state of ohio, moved from 83-17, white/non-white to 17/21. mostly african-americans in the northern part of the state. here is the state of florida. you want to know how president obama won the state of florida. look at this went from 71/29 white to non-white to 67/34. all of this growth was non-cuban hispanic bus a few notes on the hispanic vote, the president won cubans. that is something that actually has got lost in all of this yes, did he really well hispanics in florida in general and overall but he won cubans, third generation cubans. they weren't there for the bay of pigs, they don't think about hating kennedy and the democrats the way those first two generation. finally, i want to show you this map. a map of the top ten states by population with hispanics in it the top ten, the ones in blue are the ones the president won, the two in red with the two mitt romney won. republicans, watch out, these two are next. i would say arizona will be in the battleground in 2016. texas, joaquin may have a different -- probably not quite

because texas republicans a long time ago saw this and they have tried to adjust. by the way, case you are wondering, just these ten states, 216 electoral votes. steve? >> no it's incredible and coming for a long time. the last presidential candidate to get 60% of the white vote, which mitt romney did was george herbert walker bush and received over 400 electoral votes. today, gets you an electoral college drumming. president george w. bush got 44% of the hispanic vote. the problem, there are too many republican leaders in congress. if you say the word latino and play a word association game with them, they would come back with illegal immigrant, not silver star winner, not doctor, not lawyer, not policeman, not fireman. this is an important part of our community. an important part of the future of the republican party and the republican party needs to get it together on its outreach to late latinos, and it's good to hear that lindsey graham and chuck

schumer going to start advancing comprehensive immigration reform again because we have to get this off the table, a political issue for the party and we also have to have a zero toll perhaps tolerance with the terrible tone that's coming out of the talk radio universe and some of our leaders in congress who are serially disrespectful to this fastest growing democrat in the country. you have the likes of rush limbaugh taking to the radio on the issue of immigration. congressman this is what he said on wednesday. >> don't tell me the republican party doesn't have outreach. we do. but what are we suppose dodd now in order to get the hispanic or latino vote, does that mean, open the borders and embrace the illegals? i want you to think about this. is that what it means? is that what the republican establishment, we got to reach out to hispanics. is that what they mean? if we are not getting the female vote, do we become pro-choice? do we start passing out birth

control pills? is that what we have to do? >> and david, that's very telling because part of the fundamental problem with a big wing of the republican party is that when they think of hispanics, they think of folks who are illegal immigrants are. what they need to accept is that hispanics, latinos are part of this american family and they are not going anywhere. you have to folks that have been here who are second generation, third generation, fourth generation americans and they are making them feel like they are not part of the united states. and that's fundamental problem that goes beyond tone. it goes beyond rhetoric and it actually goes beyond who you elect to congress or the senate. they have got ted cruz, marco rubio and others now, but more than just the personality but the policies they pursue. >> think when journalists write about this campaigning, the fun part will be all the moments we experienced together, the gaffes romney made, the 47%, the things obama said the first debate but the fundamental loss of this campaign probably took place in the republican primaries when

they put out a group of people who were so far off the political cliff on issues that mattered to latinos, women and young people and is the new governing coalition and perhaps the fact that the economy got a little bit better is another fundamental fact but all these other things preoccupied us for some time. you can only, looking back, see those 20 debates, that push ed everybody, including romney who became a moderate much too late to get that nomination. >> it is still striking. you have some 70% in the exit polls who believe the economy is in bad shape, 52% who feel like the country is off on the wrong direction. a lot of opposition thought to president obama and his policies and yet he prevails because of a coalition ever expanding, that believes in a certain role for government, bob, that is opposed to where the republicans would like to take it. >> i think the big picture here is that president obama has got to deliver on the big issue, which is fixing the financial house of the u.s. federal government, it is in disarray,

not just the fiscal cliff but $16 trillion in ious out in the world. in a couple of months, in february or march, they are going to have to renegotiate borrowing authority for another trillion or two dollars and if the president can fix and put us on some sort of path of restoration for the economy, that is a payoff for everyone in the community, not just his base. he has got to think much more broadly, the job of the president is to find the next stage of good for a real majority. and he's capable of doing that. >> >> let's look back at the republican party. how did they become a coalition of special interest forces? they really do look like the democratic party of the '70s and '80s where they seem to the leaders in washington can't control the special interest

groups. and this is what happened to the democrats, labor, all of these special interest groups that were -- the folks in washington knew what the right way was to try to win national elections. they couldn't quite do it because they were -- basically, they succumbed to their base the democratic party started with bill clinton and obama successfully able to carry this over, never able to allow the base of the democratic party, special interest groups, to overtake the national message, the republican party -- >> the serious governing philosophy that served this country well but too many swing voters in the country, you hear the word conservative now, they they think of loons and whackos. we gave up five u.s. senate seats the last two election cycles by people who were just out there, completely extreme, manifestly up prepared for the offices that they are running for. our elected leaders scared to death of the conservative entertainment complex, the shrill and divisive voices that are bombastic and broadcasting

out into the homes and this country is rejecting the social extremism of the republican party on issue after issue. if you look at the four states that legalized gay marriage, on a range of issues, our coalition is shrink and the republican party has a lot of soul searching to do if we are going to assemble a majority. >> doris, i want to get to one other thing here, which is the movie "lincoln is opening around the country. obviously, the divisions in america were so profound at that time during the civil war. and yet today in a different way, we still have so much polarization. here is moment in the film where lincoln is talking about why do is so important to push for the abolition of slavery. >> euclid's first common notion is this, things which are equal to the same thing are equal to each other. that's rule of mathematical reasoning. it is true because it works, has done and always will do.

in his book, hmm, euclid says this is self-evident there it, even in that 2,000-year-old book of mechanical laws that is self-evident truth, that things that are equal to the same thing are equal to each other. >> can't way to the see it. you brought your own movie clip, as chuck pointed out, the polarization then, so profound, as this president now strives to be a great president, like lincoln, what is his challenge to break this polarization? does it come back to bipartisanship? >> what it comes back to is a combination of conviction, which is what we just saw lincoln talking about and willingness to compromise. without question, the whole movie is about the idea that in a session of congress, after the election in 1864, they have to get this amendment passed do everything he says, one point he says i'm clothed by immense

power and i will use it, to do what you have to do i will go back to what bob said, what the president needs to do is bring some ceos into his top positions, ddr did that brought in the head of chrysler, brought in the head of sears and roebuck. what about bringing romney in to deal with the problem of how do you keep manufacturing here than going abroad. what incentives do you use? what sanctions do you use against countries not doing things fairly? you bring people in but don't lose your conviction, tough start with what matter to us but you compromise on everything else? i think it can be done. >> the powerful olive branch that speaker boehner issued this week, where he said to the president, we want you to lead, for the republican leader to say we are willing to follow to a certain extent, he puts limitations on it, there's no question on it but for him to say that you're going to go into the house of representatives -- >> you think, bob, part of what you see and see with john boehner, he will say one thing to you and reverse course the very next day, and that is the

challenge chuck was speaking to >> but it is "the new york times" story points out and some people i've talked to, i think he's getting more control and more authority in the house republicans. >> we will see. got take another break. be back with more in just a moment. ♪ these are... [ male announcer ] marie callender's puts everything you've grown to love about sunday dinner into each of her pot pies. tender white meat chicken and vegetables in a crust made from scratch. marie callender's. it's time to savor. [ ding! ]

...and get longer nighttime cough relief. use alka-seltzer plus night cold & flu... [ coughs ] [ buzz! ] [ screams ] ...and you could find yourself... honey? ...on the couch. nyquil d. 50% longer cough and stuffy nose relief. honey? i'i invest in what i know.r. i turned 65 last week. i'm getting married. planning a life. there are risks, sure. but, there's no reward without it. i want to be prepared for the long haul. i see a world bursting with opportunities. india, china, brazil, ishares, small-caps, large-caps, ishares. industrials. low cost. every dollar counts. ishares. income. dividends. bonds. i like bonds. ishares. commodities. diversification. choices. my own ideas. ishares. i want to use the same stuff the big guys use. ishares. 9 out of 10 large, professional investors choose ishares for their etfs. introducing the ishares core, etfs for the heart of your portfolio. tax efficient and low cost building blocks to help you keep more of what you earn.

call your advisor. visit ishares.com. ishares. yeah, ishares. ishares by blackrock. call 1-800-ishares for a prospectus which includes investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses. read and consider it carefully before investing. johan comes in a porcelain vessel, crafted with care by a talented blonde from sweden. ♪ smooth, rich, never bitter, gevalia. the economy needs manufacturing. machines, tools, people making stuff. companies have to invest in making things. infrastructure, construction, production. we need it now more than ever. chevron's putting more than $8 billion dollars

back in the u.s. economy this year. in pipes, cement, steel, jobs, energy. we need to get the wheels turning. i'm proud of that. making real things... for real. ...that make a real difference. ♪ thanks to you all for a terrific conversation. before we go a quick programming note for my press pass covers this week, i sat down with buzzfeed.com editor and chief ben smith to talk about what really really was the first presidential campaign in the social media era. you can watch it at "meet the press" nbc.com, that's all for today. a special day for "meet the press," as we celebrate turning 65 years old, proud to be the longest-running television program in the world. truly is humbling to be a custodian of such an important american institution. we will be back next week. if it's sunday, it's "meet the press."